I imagine that almost all of us that have relapsing-remitting MS have been treated with Solu-medrol (intravenous methylprednisolone). I also imagine that many of us who were treated with Solu-medrol have a horror story, or at least a complaint, about this treatment.
Yes, the effects can be almost miraculous – I have dragged myself into the clinic blind in one eye and after a one-hour infusion, I have stood up and briskly walked out with full vision. Of course, I also tasted metal and felt like I had swallowed acid, after pouring some of it on my face. I have described treatment with Solu-medrol as being like someone offering to remove a bear trap from my leg, while knowing that they are going to punch me in the face as soon as it is removed.
However, the first thought I have when I hear that I need a course of Solu-medrol is that I don’t really want to have an infusion. It may sound silly (especially from someone who injects themselves daily), but I still have anxiety about the needle being stuck into my hand. I also tend to focus on the catheter that is stuck in my hand during the whole infusion process, which starts to become extremely creepy after a couple of minutes.
Therefore, I was pretty interested to attend the session called Efficacy and safety of oral versus intravenous (IV) high-dose methylprednisolone in multiple sclerosis relapses, a randomized double blind trial (COPOUSEP) at the 2014 Joint ACTRIMS-ECTRIMS Meeting.
This trial is a “non-inferiority trial” comparing oral methylprednisolone (Prednisone) to Solu-medrol, by giving 200 patients having a relapse either 1000 mg or Prednisone or Solu-medrol for 3 days. The researchers then monitored patients to see how many patients were “improved” at 28 days after treatment, as well as looking at other factors. So that participants were not aware which treatment they were receiving, the study was a “double-dummy” design, meaning all participants were given both an infusion and capsules, one of which was a placebo.
Bottom line, there was no difference between the two treatments. Both were found to have about the same effectiveness on the following measures:
“Improved” at 28 days after treatment (77.7% IV, 77.9% oral)
16% of patients on IV methylprednisolone needed retreatment versus 12.6% on oral treatment
43% on IV treatment totally recovered versus 39% on oral treatment
27.6% of people on IV treatment had another relapse after a median time of 86 days, versus 32% on oral treatment having another relapse after a median of 90.5 days
The two treatments also had very similar rates of side effects, primarily: metallic tastes, hot flashes, headache, insomnia and agitation. The last two were experienced by slightly more people in the oral treatment group.
Bottom line: I’m taking the results of this study as pretty good news, as I’m guessing that I’m not the only one who doesn’t love the infusion process. I also found it interesting that the protocol was only 3 days, which is more common in Europe, where the study was conducted, instead of the 5-day course that is typical in the United States. As the 5-day course of Solu-medrol is the oldest and most established treatment of anything MS-related in the US, it will be fascinating to see when or if this protocol is accepted by neurologists in this country.
Live Webcast: Join us this this afternoon from 2 – 3 pm ET (1 – 2 pm CT, Noon – 1 pm MT, 11am – Noon PT) for a panel discussion on MS research advances, which will be streamed online around the world. The renowned panelists will discuss significant news and findings revealed during the world’s largest gathering of MS experts. Register Now!